About Me

Buford C. Terrell
Controlled substances laws and their consequences have been the center of my professional life for over fifteen years. I host a public interest television program in Houston, “Drugs, Crime, and Politics” , produced by the Drug Policy forum of Texas, and have done so for most of its ten-year history. Before my retirement, I taught a seminar, “Controlled Substances Law” for many years at South Texas College of Law.
In this blog I intend to explore the features and consequences of those laws, especially the unintended consequences, and look at the need for, and possibility of, changing them. Don’t expect a lot of breaking news or current events, although there will be some. My approach will be more historical and theoretical. I hope to get a lot of criticism – good, bad, and otherwise – and to start some good, heated discussions.

Monday, September 30, 2013

Good Golly Miss Molly

Good
Golly Miss Molly

My
favorite recreational drug has been thoroughly maligned in the press recently.Two or three young people have died at music
events, apparently of overdoses of a “new” drug known as “Molly”.Molly was claimed to be an unusually pure
version of the fad club drug of the 1980s and ‘90s: Ecstasy.As is usual with drug stories, these reports
were false and hysterically overdrawn; and they were false and hysterical in
ways that repeat many other drug Prohibition tales.

But
first comes a brief explanation of the drug known as Ecstasy.Ecstasy (Eve, E, or X) is methylenedioxy-N-methamphetamine
(usually known by the abbreviation MDMA).It is a fairly old chemical, discovered in the 1910s, at about the same
time as the related compound methamphetamine. MDMA was ignored until the 1970s when
Alexander Shulgin examined it as part of his extended study of psychedelics. Psychotherapists
were quick to pick up on its value and were using MDMA in couples therapy. Grief
counseling, and end-of-life preparation.After the DEA placed the drug in Schedule I, the use continued in other
countries, and it is completing Stage III clinical trials for FDA approval now
for use in treating PTSD.

The
same effects of MDMA that make it useful for therapy also make it attractive as
a recreational drug – increased empathy, expansive and relaxed mood, and
heightened sensation (combined these features show why it is frequently called
the “hug drug”).Additionally, its physiological
effects preclude addiction.Since it
depletes the brain’s supply of serotonin, additional doses have no effect. By the early 1980s it was common in dance
clubs in Dallas and Austin.When the
clubs themselves began selling it to their patrons and accepting credit cards
for payment, the DEA rushed into an emergency scheduling procedure and placed
MDMA in Schedule I.In the meantime, use
of MDMA spread to raves – large (thousands of attendees) all-night dance
parties, all across the U. S. and over to Europe.The Netherlands became the center of its
manufacture.This explosion in use was
occurring while the DEA was rapidly enforcing its new powers against the drug.

Soon
reports began appearing in the media alarming over Ecstasy “overdose”
deaths.Investigation revealed that
those deaths were from heat exhaustion brought on by hours of dancing in close,
overheated quarters without sufficient hydration.Since MDMA does slightly impair the body’s
heat regulation, it was a slight contributory cause of these deaths, but as the
dance venues responded by providing cooling-off areas and access to water and
as users learned the importance of hydration, these deaths disappeared
(ironically, at least one subsequent death was attributed to water overdose –
yes, one can kill himself by ODing on water – by a young woman who took the
warnings too seriously.During the same
time period, more high school and college football players died of heat
exhaustion during practice than died after taking MDMA.

As
the DEA began enforcing its new ban on MDMA, the overt quasi-legal
manufacturers in the Netherlands were suppressed and replaced by myriads of
small, shady. Fly-by-night operations.Counterfeits and adulterants became frequent, methamphetamine and DXM,
the cough syrup ingredient used by many children as a weak hallucinogen, were
among the most common[1].

The
story now circles back to Miss Molly.When follow-up stories examined the Molly scare, they found the
incidents had nothing to do with MDMA.Molly was a distinct synthetic chemical named ME-2, not related to MDMA
except by marketing devices; and the deaths had nothing to do with MDMA.

The
substitution of lethal ME-2 for benign MDMA repeats a sad dreary refrain
recurring throughout the history of Prohibition.During the 1920s, thousands died and many
thousands were sickened or maimed by jakeleg and sterno or by adulterated
alcohol (intentionally denatured by the government with known poisons).Many – if not most – of the heroin deaths
reported during the last century have been caused by adulterants or
substitutions (one notorious epidemic was caused by the substitution of
fentanyl for heroin).Marijuana users
know what has happened when dangerous chemicals have been marketed as “synthetic”
marijuana.Black markets have no
chemical control; street-corner pushers are not inspected by the FDA.When Prohibitionists are confronted with
these predictable and sure results of their imposed morality, they merely shrug
and say, “They did it to themselves.They should have obeyed the law and abstained.”The alcohol Prohibitionists even forced the
government to use a more toxic denaturant so that drinking would be even more
deadly.

The
Molly incidents also renewed a frequent Prohibitionist propaganda ploy.Molly was described as a purer and stronger
form of MDMA, and therefore more deadly.The story was first told about heroin being stronger and more deadly
than morphine.These doom-sayers
proclaimed crack as a more deadly and addictive form of cocaine.Meth is decried as much worse than its urbane
brother, amphetamine.And of course,
their current cry is “It’s not your grandfather’s marijuana.”Fear is apparently a classically addictive
substance: its compulsive users exhibit tolerance.They need larger and larger fixes to get the
same result.

The
Molly stories did not reveal a threat either to the youth of the nation or to
public health.Both of those could
easily be achieved by legalizing and regulating MDMA.What they did was provide another sad chapter
in the irrational and destructive history of Prohibitionism.Now is the time to replace myth and hysteria
by a factual accounting of what is really happening.

[1]
PERSONAL DISCLAIMER:MDMA is my favorite
recreational drug.For several years in
the mid-90s I used it often – about once or twice a month.I stopped when counterfeits became so common
that the risk of use was simply too high.